Transcript Philosophy 224

Philosophy 224
Plato
Republic
Plato (428-347 BCE)
• Plato was from an old aristocratic
family in Athens. Many of the
important people of his time
appear as characters in his
dialogues.
• As a young man, Plato was
greatly interested in philosophy
and politics. He was a friend and
companion of Socrates. After the
death of Socrates, he fled Athens.
• Upon returning to Athens around
385 BCE, he founded his school,
the Academy, which many people
call the first university. It lasted
until 529 ACE. He taught at the
academy, with a few
interruptions, until his death.
Plato’s Work
• Plato’s philosophical project is available to us
primarily through a series of dialogues.
• The dialogues pose us a particular problem of
interpretation.
• They are very tightly constructed dramatic
presentations of various philosophical issues.
• Though the philosophical content is at the heart of
these dialogues, it is not a simple matter to separate
the dramatic elements from the philosophical.
• Actually, we might not even want to, as Plato
himself seems to suggest that the dramatic form is
important to the content.
Socrates (470-399 BC)
•
Like Plato’s relatives, Socrates was a real person who was a central figure in
Plato’s dialogues. We know some things about him, because he was a relatively
prominent Athenian. He came from a middle class background. He was usually
described as a robust, though unattractive man. He was born at the time of the
peak of Athenian power and was an adult at the time of the Peloponnesian war, in
which he served with distinction.
•
We know much less about his thinking because he left no writings and it is
therefore difficult to discern his actual philosophical positions.
•
There are a few characteristics of what Socrates was all about upon which there is
general agreement.
•
•
•
•
Socrates was primarily concerned with ethical matters.
Socrates searched for universal definitions— “What is X?”
Socrates’ method was the elenchus. A thesis is extracted from an interlocutor, further
beliefs are elicited, these beliefs are shown to be inconsistent with the original thesis.
Socrates’ used irony (the use of a word to express something other than the literal
meaning )as a rhetorical strategy. Irony provided the opportunities for: humor, mockery
and posing riddles (and perhaps suggesting conclusions).
The Republic
• The Republic is generally regarded as Plato’s masterwork.
• It’s a dialogue devoted to the question: What is Dikaiosune?
• Dikaiosune is a complicated Greek word. It is usually
translated as ‘justice,’ but probably means something closer to
‘the proper way to live one’s life.’ The translation in the book
translates it as ‘morality.’
• In the dialogue, Socrates’s two interlocutors (Glaucon and
Adiemantus) have asked Socrates to accomplish two things:
• Provide an account of human nature which makes clear why
Dikaiosune suits us;
• Explain how we can create a person of Dikaiosune (education)
and demonstrate that their life is the best life.
From the Macrocosm to
the Microcosm
• In response to the question about education, Plato suggests an
interesting argument from analogy. Since justice is a feature of
cities as well as individuals, let’s try to isolate justice in the larger
context. If we can do that, then we can apply it to the smaller
context (the human soul).
• In his analysis of the city, he identifies 3 different sorts of citizens,
too which belong different, characteristic virtues.
Types
Virtues
Ruler Guardian
Wisdom
Auxiliary Guardian
(police/military)
Courage
Tradesperson
Moderation (self-discipline)
So Where’s Justice?
• Using the virtue of moderation as the clue (in a city,
moderation is expressed in a shared commitment to the
common order, Plato identifies dikaiosune in the city as the
well-orderedness of the city: each sort of person doing what
they are best suited for (41).
• S then lists the evidence we have for this claim:
1.
2.
3.
this sort of constancy seems to be the condition for the
presence of the other virtues;
common understanding of justice as ensuring to each what is
their own is consistent with this idea (42);
injustice in a city seems to arise when people stray from their
suited place (43).
What about the Soul?
• Now that we’ve seen justice in the city, we need to finish the
argument and apply our insight to the human soul.
• We have to determine if the soul has the same structure as the city
and if justice in the soul is to be understood like justice in the
city—the well-orderedness of the soul—If it (Justice) is the same
property (form) in each (44)?
• In connection to the first question, S provides an argument for the
partition of the soul, based on the idea that one and the same
thing cannot take contradictory positions on the same object, but
like a top, which can be considered to be both moving and
standing still depending on what element you concentrate on, we
can understand the possibility of one composite thing taking
opposing positions with regard to the same object
The Soul is a top?
• In fact, when we reflect on our minds, we see ourselves
taking up such opposing positions.
• Plato’s example of thirst leads us to conclude that the soul
has at least two parts: rational and the appetitive (desiring
soul).
• But what about the spirited part of the soul (the seat of the
emotions)?
• Initially we must suppose that it could be an aspect of one of
the other two, but a closer look shows us that this is not the
case: 1)not part of the appetites, because we often get angry
with ourselves for giving in to them, and our anger can
sometimes help us control them (440a—Leontius); 2)small
children show anger well before they show rational capacities
so can’t be part of the rational soul either (441b).
Conclusion
• Therefore, the structure of the city is mirrored in the
soul.
• Plato goes on to insist that all of the virtues of the city
are mirrored in the soul as well.
• Finally, he concludes that a person is just in the same
way that a city is just (48).
• Then, starting at 443c-d (51), Plato offers us a
description of the just soul.
What About Injustice?
• In large part, the discussion of justice is over, but there are a
few loose ends to tie up. In particular, we need to consider
what our account has to say about injustice.
• As with a city, an unjust soul is one that is out of balance
(444b).
• This in turn permits the drawing of an analogy between
justice and health—just as justice=balance soul,
health=balanced body.
• This allows us to conclude in turn that virtue is a kind of health
(444c).
• This allows us to conclude that the life of a person of
Dikaiosune is the best life (445b).
We still need to talk about
human Nature
• The account is, if anything, more complex than the account
we get of justice.
• The text doesn’t give us a great deal to work with, but it is
one of the most famous sections of the Republic. It’s called
the Allegory of the Cave.
• The Allegory is part of Plato’s response to metaphysical and
epistemological issue concerning universals like dikaiosune:
namely, what sort of things are they and what sort of
knowledge is it that we have of them?
• Plato offers three different analogies or allegories to help us
understand his answers to these questions. The Allegory of
the Cave is the final (and unifying) of these.
The Cave
The Prisoners
• All that a person like those described as being chained
in front of the wall could see of themselves, other
people, and the puppets would be shadows on the wall.
• All that they could have any sensory experience of
would be mediated by the wall (hearing=echo).
• The implication is clear: we are like prisoners in the
cave (for the most part, humans live on the bottom part
of the line), but there is a way out.
The Escapee
• What if a prisoner were released? What would her experience be like?
•
•
She would be disoriented, her senses painfully struggling to deal with the
increase in illumination/change in object, and her consciousness
struggling to process the new experience.
If someone asked her, she’d likely insist that the familiar shadows were
more real than the blurring/buzzing confusion she was currently
experiencing.
• Eventually she would orient to her new context and she would grasp
the nature of the illusion that she had lived in. Her senses would be
capable of distinguishing the faint light of the exit of the cave, and
she would likely enough explore it and find her way into the full light
of the sun.
• What would her experience be like at this stage? Probably much like
when she was first freed (though with more confidence). Eventually
she would discover that the sun (Good) is the truth of the whole.
The Philosopher
• What do you think the mood of this lucky person would be?
How would she evaluate her situation relative to the
situation of the people still in the cave? In the face of the
gap between the situations, she might be motivated to return
to the cave. Why?
• What would the experience of the return be like? She would
once again be blind, but this time by darkness (ignorance)
rather than light (access to knowledge).
• Her former colleagues would doubtless be tempted to blame
her blindness and lack of fit on what she know knows, and thus
stigmatize her accomplishment.
• If she kept trying to convince people to accept what she knows
to be true, they’d likely end up killing her (like Socrates).